Linux-Advocacy Digest #245, Volume #32 Fri, 16 Feb 01 18:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Why Open Source better be careful - The Microsoft Un-American Activities
Committee ("[Bad-Knees]")
Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Interesting article ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Interesting article (J Sloan)
Re: I will give MS credit for one thing (Bob Hauck)
Re: Interesting article ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Interesting article ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ("Joe Malloy")
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux 64 bit and Windows 32 bit ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux Mandrake and DHCP ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Windows guy. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: The Windows guy. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Interesting article ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
It's just too easy ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Interesting article ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux ("Edward Rosten")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "[Bad-Knees]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Open Source better be careful - The Microsoft Un-American Activities
Committee
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:46:23 +0000
Guns are bad mmmkay!
Gnu is good!
By the how did you guys mix up a decent desktop, with human rights'n
stuff
..if it ain't broke, tweak it.
[Bad-Knees] (Whats so bad about knees anyway)
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> "pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Flacco wrote:
>> > >
>> > > I think I see where this is going.
>> > >
>> > > Does anyone remember the press release by Ximian awhile ago about
>> > > the Chinese getting involved with the GNOME project? Enough FUD in
>> > > there to feed an army.
>> > >
>> > > That said - note to Ximian - please provide a distribution that has
>> > > not
>> been
>> > > touched by the bloody hands of the CCP, for those of us who still
>> remember
>> > > Tiananmen.
>> >
>> > Erm - please remind me: in what way does Ximinan support the the
>> > dictatorial policies of China?
>>
>> Well, it appears in todays society, having anything to do with a human
>> rights violator is tantamount to committing the violations yourself.
>> For instance, IBM is being sued because they sold tabulation machines
>> to the Nazi's for use in their death camps. Surely, if IBM loses,
>> knowingly cooperating with human rights violators would be the same.
>>
>> > What Ximinan _does_ support is making things a whole lot better for
>> > Linux users.
>>
>> At the cost of a few human lives. (if you don't see the connection,
>> look harder. If the Chinese government uses Linux for their primary
>> OS, and changes are contributed to support the Chinese government, then
>> clearly Linux is actively being used to assist human rights violations)
>>
>
> On one hand:
>
> Guns are bad....because Nazis and Communists use them to kill innocent
> people
>
> On the other hand:
>
> Guns are good...because we use them to kill Nazis and Communists.
>
>
> However...there is a THIRD possibility...namely that there is nothing
> moral nor immoral about a gun...it's the ACTIONS OF THE PERSON using it.
>
> Same for Linux and the Chinese.
>
> Linux isn't immoral...it's the CHINESE GOVERNMENT that is.
>
>
>
>> If that doesn't matter to you, no big deal. If it does, you'd be a
>> hypocrite to use Linux.
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls.
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:12:05 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:37:42 -0000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Thu, 15 Feb 2001 23:43:47 GMT, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> |||
>>> / | \
>>
>>Man, I miss my old Atari ST!
>
> ...a GUI and OS that fit into a 200K ROM.
Indeed. And Amiga was pretty good, too. :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- ah, those were the days
EAC code #191 11d:15h:43m actually running Linux.
Are you still here?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 00:14:20 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:12:05 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >Terminal Services allows you a graphical login, it comes with 2000 & XP.
> >It has security and the protocol is more efficent than X.
>
> Being a decade and a half younger, one would hope so...
Ha? One would assume that X would be the more efficent protocol, being more
mature, and being developed at a time that make even low bandwitdh
connection of today high bandwidth one then.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,soc.singles
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:21:12 GMT
Aaron Kulkis writes:
>> Edward Rosten writes:
>>>>>>>>>> Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>>>>>>>>>>> Tholen, David
>>>>>>>>>>> 1505 Alexander St,
>>>>>>>>>>> Honolulu, HI 96822-4978
>>>>>>>>>>> (808)941-3552
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Tholen, David Alexander St Apt 406, Honolulu, HI
>>>>>>>>>>> 96822
>>>>>>>>>> Of what relevance is that, Kulkis?
>>>>>>>>> Is this correct (even if it is not relavent)?
>>>>>>>> What difference would it make?
>>>>>>> To what?
>>>>>> More like "to whom", given that you're the one asking the question. Or
>>>>>> do you consider yourself a "what"?
>>>>> It would go some way towards demonstrating Kulkis' credibility if it
>>>>> were true.
>>>> The issue is not Kulkis' credibility at the moment, but rather the
>>>> relevance of his posting.
>>> Where did you get that idea?
>> From what I wrote immediately after he posted that material.
>>> My question was not about the relevance of Kulkis' post, but about
>>> its accuracy.
>> Thus non sequitur.
>>> Whether relavent or not, is Kulkis' post accurate?
>> What difference would it make?
>>> (This has now become a question of his cerdibility).
>> On what basis do you make that claim, and what is "cerdibility"?
>>>>>>>> My question is about the relevance, not
>>>>>>> So?
>>>>>> Precisely. What difference would it make?
>>>>> To what or to whom?
>>>> More like "to whom", given that you're the one asking the question. Or
>>>> do you consider yourself a "what"?
>>> I am both an object and a person, so either will do. So, to what or whom
>>> would this post make a difference to?
>> You apparently, given that you're the one asking the question, as if
>> it would make a difference.
>>>>>>>> the correctness. I could also ask about the redundancy.
>>>>>>> Is it correct (relavence aside)?
>>>>>> What difference would it make?
>>>>> To what or to whom?
>>>> More like "to whom", given that you're the one asking the question. Or
>>>> do you consider yourself a "what"?
>>> This part should be ended here for the sake of berivity.
>> What is "berivity"?
> Ooooooh, a typo-flame.
>
> How...childish.
How...ironic.
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:24:48 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:12:05 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > >Terminal Services allows you a graphical login, it comes with 2000 & XP.
> > >It has security and the protocol is more efficent than X.
> >
> > Being a decade and a half younger, one would hope so...
>
> Ha? One would assume that X would be the more efficent protocol, being more
> mature, and being developed at a time that make even low bandwitdh
> connection of today high bandwidth one then.
X was designed for ethernet lans -
jjs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: I will give MS credit for one thing
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:28:01 GMT
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:32:34 +0000, Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 01:43:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote:
>> On 15 Feb 2001 00:48:42 -0600, Donn Miller
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I am no MS advocate. But, I will admit one thing: Windows Media
>>> player is >much better than the video MPEG players I have used on
>>> Linux.
>>
>> That's good. You're gonna be using it a lot if MS gets their way:
>> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/16959.html>
[quoting]
> Microsoft's Secure Audio Path technology is designed at an operating
> system level, allegedly) to keep the content encrypted right up until
> the machine's sound card is actually playing it.
Of more relevance to the subject of liking WMP or not liking it is the
part about making deals with content providers to only release in the MS
format.
>As someone has already pointed out, all you need is a couple of croc-clips
>across the speaker terminals, or even the amp input.
Yeah, but you'd lose some quality. But the purpose of the scheme isn't
to prevent that kind of piracy, but to give more control to providers in
the same way that DivX was supposed to do for DVD's.
>I'm not against musicians getting their dues. I just don't like the
>prospect of MS controlling everything.
Which was my point. They want to make WMP into a "standard" that they
control. One way to do that would be to make deals with record and
movie companies to only release computer versions in their format. To
set up a cartel in other words. The bait for the record companies is
the ability to have "pay for play", while MS can get a royalty for each
recording put into their format. A great deal for everyone except the
consumer.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 00:26:48 +0200
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:12:05 +0200, Ayende Rahien
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > >Terminal Services allows you a graphical login, it comes with 2000 &
XP.
> > > >It has security and the protocol is more efficent than X.
> > >
> > > Being a decade and a half younger, one would hope so...
> >
> > Ha? One would assume that X would be the more efficent protocol, being
more
> > mature, and being developed at a time that make even low bandwitdh
> > connection of today high bandwidth one then.
>
> X was designed for ethernet lans -
My main development computer is a PIII-500 + 384MB
I *still* try make everything I run be as efficent as possible. (sometimes
to a fault, I've been told)
I don't see any reason for X to be un-efficent only because it was meant to
be used on lans.
Since TS can be used from 56Kbps (and 28Kbps as well, I've heard), there is
no reason X shouldn't.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 00:29:53 +0200
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:96k9m0$rgo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:12:05 +0200, Ayende Rahien
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > >Terminal Services allows you a graphical login, it comes with 2000
&
> XP.
> > > > >It has security and the protocol is more efficent than X.
> > > >
> > > > Being a decade and a half younger, one would hope so...
> > >
> > > Ha? One would assume that X would be the more efficent protocol, being
> more
> > > mature, and being developed at a time that make even low bandwitdh
> > > connection of today high bandwidth one then.
> >
> > X was designed for ethernet lans -
>
> My main development computer is a PIII-500 + 384MB
> I *still* try make everything I run be as efficent as possible. (sometimes
> to a fault, I've been told)
> I don't see any reason for X to be un-efficent only because it was meant
to
> be used on lans.
> Since TS can be used from 56Kbps (and 28Kbps as well, I've heard), there
is
> no reason X shouldn't.
Addition, as efficently.
I know that I'm going to be flamed by people saying that they use X over
56Kbps.
The question is how good is it compare to higher bandwidth connections, and
how good is it compare to TS on the same bandwidth.
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:34:36 -0500
Tholen tholes again (no, wait, that's redundant!):
> > Ooooooh, a typo-flame.
> >
> > How...childish.
>
> How...ironic.
How...Tholen.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:38:43 +0000
In article <nqej6.57245$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Edward Rosten writes:
>
>>>>>>>>> Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>
>>>>>>>>>> Tholen, David
>>>>>>>>>> 1505 Alexander St,
>>>>>>>>>> Honolulu, HI 96822-4978
>>>>>>>>>> (808)941-3552
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Tholen, David Alexander St Apt 406, Honolulu, HI
>>>>>>>>>> 96822
>
>>>>>>>>> Of what relevance is that, Kulkis?
>
>>>>>>>> Is this correct (even if it is not relavent)?
>
>>>>>>> What difference would it make?
>
>>>>>> To what?
>
>>>>> More like "to whom", given that you're the one asking the question.
>>>>> Or do you consider yourself a "what"?
>
>>>> It would go some way towards demonstrating Kulkis' credibility if it
>>>> were true.
>
>>> The issue is not Kulkis' credibility at the moment, but rather the
>>> relevance of his posting.
>
>> Where did you get that idea?
>
> From what I wrote immediately after he posted that material.
My question is not about the relevance of Kulkis' post.
>> My question was not about the relevance of Kulkis' post, but about its
>> accuracy.
>
> Thus non sequitur.
Not every post has to follow exactly from the previous one.
>> Whether relavent or not, is Kulkis' post accurate?
>
> What difference would it make?
To whom or to what?
>> (This has now become a question of his cerdibility).
>
> On what basis do you make that claim, and what is "cerdibility"?
A typographic error caused by me trying to touch type with limited
success.
>>>>>>> My question is about the relevance, not
>
>>>>>> So?
>
>>>>> Precisely. What difference would it make?
>
>>>> To what or to whom?
>
>>> More like "to whom", given that you're the one asking the question. Or
>>> do you consider yourself a "what"?
>
>> I am both an object and a person, so either will do. So, to what or
>> whom would this post make a difference to?
>
> You apparently, given that you're the one asking the question, as if it
> would make a difference.
Irrelavent.
>>>>>>> the correctness. I could also ask about the redundancy.
>
>>>>>> Is it correct (relavence aside)?
>
>>>>> What difference would it make?
>
>>>> To what or to whom?
>
>>> More like "to whom", given that you're the one asking the question. Or
>>> do you consider yourself a "what"?
>
>> This part should be ended here for the sake of berivity.
>
> What is "berivity"?
Another typographic error.
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux 64 bit and Windows 32 bit
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:41:44 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Edward Rosten wrote:
>>
>> > It seems unlikely that the Itanium code can be called finished until
>> > the chip ships.
>>
>> In case you hadn't noticed, the Itanium is shipping now, in HP
>> computers.
>>
>> MS somehow coerced intel in to not releasing it for lower end stuff
>> until MS were finished.
>
> To the benefit of AMD.
>
> I'll bet this is the LAST time Intel ever makes a deal like that.
I hope so. If the 64 bit AMD cpus hit the market soon, they could make a
really big impact.
This is one thing Linux is *really* good for. Since it is so portable, it
meand that every CPU around can have a very high quality, highly
avaliable OS developed in a very short time. The result should be much
greater competition in the CPU market, since CPU vendors don't need a
whole new OS to be made.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake and DHCP
Date: 16 Feb 2001 22:42:36 GMT
Pete Goodwin <imekon@$$$remove$$$.freeuk.com> wrote:
> Hopefully my Linux Mandrake setup won't have much longer to live... roll on
> SuSE 7.1! (Here's hoping).
> Well, I got my Cable modem today. It's all working on Windows 98 SE with no
> problems.
> Alas, poor Linux Mandrake...
> I configure it as follows:
> eth0 - private address on my own network
> eth1 - DHCP
> and restarted the network.
> eth0 hangs and eventually times out (what's this? It's got an address, it
> looks like it's trying to use DHCP? Strange!)
> eth1 hangs and times out too. No network. Oh dear!
> Now, this is highly likely to be a Linux Mandrake issue (which is why I'll
> be trying another distro). I'll probably have a look in the HOWTO's but it
> depends on how complex it all gets.
Idiot, man ifconfig. Follow directions, find the problem.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:43:40 +0000
> Edward Rosten wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Hanson"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Edward Rosten wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Hanson"
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Edward Rosten wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > He's talking non-interactive. With an interactive editor
>> >> >> > > like Notepad or vi, one must manually open the file into the
>> >> >> > > text buffer and do
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Vi can do noninteractive stuff. Wirte a script for the ex abck
>> >> >> > end and execute that, just like ed scripts, but better.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > -Ed
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Ed is the one true editor...."
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Ed??!? You use ed? What a wimp! Anything above DEBUG is a waste
>> >> > of resources. It's a little hard to duplicate graphics in hex,
>> >> > though...
>> >> > :-)
>> >>
>> >> Pfeh! When I *really* want to get something done, I use cat.
>> >>
>> >> -ed
>> >>
>> >
>> > Sorry for the delay in responding. One of the LEDs above my front
>> > panel switches is acting up. I get distracted and lose my place in
>> > the file.
>>
>> I recently invested in a Teletype. My paper bills have gone through the
>> roof, but I can now use line orientated tools such as ed, rather than
>> having to rely on the 1 byte at a time leds on the front.
>>
>> I really think that these teletypes will be the next big thing.
>>
>
> Oy. Too much bloat. I'd have to start buying 60 minute cassettes.
Yeah, well, *I* have a FM (sic) floppy disk drive as well. And they both
still work almost as good as new.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:45:32 +0000
> Edward Rosten wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Hanson"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Edward Rosten wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Hanson"
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Edward Rosten wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > He's talking non-interactive. With an interactive editor
>> >> >> > > like Notepad or vi, one must manually open the file into the
>> >> >> > > text buffer and do
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Vi can do noninteractive stuff. Wirte a script for the ex abck
>> >> >> > end and execute that, just like ed scripts, but better.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > -Ed
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Ed is the one true editor...."
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Ed??!? You use ed? What a wimp! Anything above DEBUG is a waste
>> >> > of resources. It's a little hard to duplicate graphics in hex,
>> >> > though...
>> >> > :-)
>> >>
>> >> Pfeh! When I *really* want to get something done, I use cat.
>> >>
>> >> -ed
>> >>
>> >
>> > Sorry for the delay in responding. One of the LEDs above my front
>> > panel switches is acting up. I get distracted and lose my place in
>> > the file.
>>
>> I recently invested in a Teletype. My paper bills have gone through the
>> roof, but I can now use line orientated tools such as ed, rather than
>> having to rely on the 1 byte at a time leds on the front.
>>
>> I really think that these teletypes will be the next big thing.
>>
>
> baaaaaaah, paper punch tape is all you need.
>
Not a patch on my new 18 inch, 2MB winchester.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: 16 Feb 2001 22:49:31 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:12:05 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > >Terminal Services allows you a graphical login, it comes with 2000 & XP.
>> > >It has security and the protocol is more efficent than X.
>> >
>> > Being a decade and a half younger, one would hope so...
>>
>> Ha? One would assume that X would be the more efficent protocol, being more
>> mature, and being developed at a time that make even low bandwitdh
>> connection of today high bandwidth one then.
> X was designed for ethernet lans -
ssh -C
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: It's just too easy
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:50:15 +0000
I installed a new NIC in a frien's RH 6.2 box today.
It went something like this:
Open the case.
Push out the blanking plate
Swear at the case manufacturer for using push out blanking plates
resulting in me not having enough screws any more.
Put in the NIC
Screw it up.
Put the case on
Plug bits in
Boot up.
kudzo loads.
Enter the IP address.
Away!
I had to include the hardware bit to make it look like I'd done something.
It's too easy. This has been my experience (more or less) with adding
hardware since RH5.2 (my forst distro). This is why I am skeptical about
the wintrolls with all these problems. I've simply never had them.
All problems I have had have been with faulty hardware. All the other
problems have been with Win9X which is quite frankly awful.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: 16 Feb 2001 22:51:24 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>>
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 21:12:05 +0200, Ayende Rahien
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > >Terminal Services allows you a graphical login, it comes with 2000 &
> XP.
>> > > >It has security and the protocol is more efficent than X.
>> > >
>> > > Being a decade and a half younger, one would hope so...
>> >
>> > Ha? One would assume that X would be the more efficent protocol, being
> more
>> > mature, and being developed at a time that make even low bandwitdh
>> > connection of today high bandwidth one then.
>>
>> X was designed for ethernet lans -
> My main development computer is a PIII-500 + 384MB
> I *still* try make everything I run be as efficent as possible. (sometimes
> to a fault, I've been told)
> I don't see any reason for X to be un-efficent only because it was meant to
> be used on lans.
> Since TS can be used from 56Kbps (and 28Kbps as well, I've heard), there is
> no reason X shouldn't.
Ive used TS at 56kbps. Ive also used X at 56kbps. Theyre both equally unusable.
Though at about 128kbps, things get better. Piping X11 through ssh with a -C
option makes X usable and quite efficient, while TS's natural state is much
slower, but workable none the less.
Note that the speed of the newest VNCw/compression kicks both their asses.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:54:16 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "mlw"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tim Hanson wrote:
>>
>> No doubt Allchin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) knows full well what he's
>> doing. He's extracting a little mileage out of Napster concerns to
>> equate open source software to stealing songs over the 'net. I'm sure
>> he and his cronies are having a laugh over the gullibility of that
>> interviewer (and at how angry they made Linux advocates) now.
>>
>> These are evil people. Really down there.
>
> That is something that concerns me. Microsoft is "evil" but not because
> it intends to do wrong, but it intends to do without regard, and
> sometimes to the spite, of others.
>
> Looking back, M$ was once the little guy, and we cheered it on because
> we thought it would change things. It has become Fidel Castro, using
> past revolutionary glory to hide its crimes and be the "establishment."
> Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Perhaps we should have chosen
> CP/M, maybe Kildal would have conducted business with just a few more
> scruples.
And the pigs started walking on two legs...
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
